Articles

The fact that the number of abortions performed at Planned Parenthood clinics across the country is rising and not falling is further evidence that the procedure is a major revenue generator for them, and your tax dollars and my tax dollars are used to fund this soulless enterprise.

Americans must decide the future they want for their country. If we wish to preserve the unique tradition begun by our Founders, we must rediscover the importance of religion and put God back in the foreground of our social and political consciousness.

For the millions of pro-life Americans who pinned their hopes for the protection of unborn life on the principled leadership of Rep. Stupak, one thing is crystal clear: We've been had - and so have the unborn.

If our society chooses to embrace the notion that the unborn only matter when they are wanted (and affordable), it is only a matter of time before we allow ourselves to be persuaded that the human rights of infants, the disabled, the elderly, the poor, the unproductive, or even the unemployed are similarly mutable. This way of looking at our fellow humans - no matter how cleverly disguised by the rhetoric of ┼grights┼h or ┼gdignity┼h - is evidence of a poisonous and depraved state of mind; it is the very embodiment of St. Augustine┼fs disordered soul, which rejects the pursuit of God and His Truth in favor of its own perverted priorities and desires.

This utilitarian approach to life and death issues represents an impoverished view of humanity and poses a grave threat to the future of civilization - especially to the weak, the frail, and the vulnerable. As human beings, our right to life should never be subject to a litmus test. Our net worth is far more than the sum of our assets and liabilities. Furthermore, we are obligated by our very humanity to care for the weak and frail among us. If we live long enough, the day will likely come when each of us will rely on someone else to care for us. I, for one, hope that when that day comes I live in a world that looks at me and sees a person, not a "problem."

Less than a month ago, on December 19, 2009, all eyes in Washington were fixed on one man: Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat from Nebraska. Senator Nelson found himself the man of the hour when it became clear that his vote and his vote alone was the only thing preventing the controversial Senate health care bill from being voted on after months of negotiations. ,,, This article discusses Senator Ben Nelson's "Cornhusker Kickback" betrayal of his pro-life stance.

What abortion advocates ignore is that unless we first preserve the right to life, all other rights are meaningless. Rights mean nothing to a corpse. Life is necessary to enjoy freedoms and exercise rights - including the so-called right to healthcare.

Until we repudiate the false notion that we can have sex without consequence and abortion without injury, organizations like Planned Parenthood will continue their government-assisted campaign to sexualize our children. A step in the right direction would be for Congress to defund Planned Parenthood and stop interfering with parents' rightful role in educating their children about sex.

Contrary to what President Obama and his liberal allies may think, the abortion debate is not merely a "political wedge issue," and it is certainly not "stale and fruitless." For those who believe that life begins at the moment of conception - for those who view "choice" as a euphemism for "killing-for-convenience" - abortion is the defining civil rights issue of our time. Pro-life taxpayers will not tolerate being made unwilling accomplices in the federally-funded destruction of unborn children.

Today our methods of playing God are more subtle, but no less inhumane. With our righteous defense of a woman's "right to choose" and an individual's "right to die," we assume the divine mantle of Creation and Destruction. With our embrace of bioethicists like Peter Singer - who defines personhood according to a utilitarian "quality-of-life" criteria that does not recognize the humanity of the unborn, the disabled, the diseased, or the infirm - we endeavor to remake nature in our own vain image. So it is with genetic technology. When wielded proudly, unconstrained by humility and a sense of our place in the natural order, it represents a grave danger.

One might think that even the most ardent disciples of science would acknowledge the problems (if not the downright creepiness) inherent in blending human and non-human genetic material, but no. Instead, critics are dismissing the grave ethical and moral concerns at stake as paranoid hyperbole and characterizing opposition to human-animal hybrid experimentation as yet another attempt to sabotage scientific progress, and thus, the betterment of mankind.

As he advances his agenda, President Obama would do well to remember his own inspiring words and ask himself if his policies will preserve the American tradition of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, or whether they will sacrifice these precious ideals on the altar of utility and scientific expedience.

As with other issues involving life's most critical questions, the right to die is not a simple matter of "choice." Its implications stretch much further than the wishes of any one individual. It is incumbent upon policy makers to understand these implications, and to not be swayed by the misleading rhetoric of choice, or the allure of the bottom line. They will also do well to remember that the idea that there are some lives "not worth living" undergirded Adolph Hitler's Aryan-supremacy world view. His policy of eliminating the "unworthy" began with the mentally handicapped and physically disabled but spread to millions of Jews.